Minister of Justice and Correctional Services v Walus

Janusz Jakub Walus was convicted in 1993 of the murder of Chris Hani and sentenced to death, later commuted to life imprisonment. After serving more than 21 years, he applied for parole under s 136(1) of the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998. In April 2015 the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services refused to place him on parole, recommending instead a further 12-month profile and participation in restorative justice processes. The parole process included a victim impact statement from Hani’s widow, but this statement was neither furnished to Walus for response nor considered by the Minister when making the decision. Walus sought judicial review, and the High Court set aside the Minister’s decision and substituted it with an order placing him on parole. The Minister appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld. The High Court’s substitution order was set aside. The matter was remitted to the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services for reconsideration of the parole application within 90 days, with no order as to costs.

The case affirms the centrality of procedural fairness in parole decisions and clarifies that victim impact statements are a mandatory and material component of the parole process. It reinforces the distinction between review and appeal, cautions against judicial substitution of administrative discretion, and applies Constitutional Court authority (AllPay) on the materiality of procedural irregularities under PAJA.